US Withdraws Its Ambassador To Syria

I see this as the United States yielding to the Europeans on this matter as it relates to Syria. As it likely will, relative to the Syrian intelligence and security apparatus operating - likely controlling - the spook community in Lebanon, the Europeans will be seeking answers from the Syrians rather than an admission that is unlikely to come.

Remarkable as it sounds, the United States and France worked together to pass UNSC resolution 1559 in September 2004. It passed with nine votes in support and six abstentations, among them were China and Russia. Lebanon objected to the resolution, but France continued to press for it.

The resolution called for 'support for a free and fair electoral process in Lebanon's upcoming presidential election conducted according to Lebanese constitutional rules devised without foreign interference or influence.'

It is a wonder why Lebanon would object to this, but it is especially ironic that 'foreign interference' did in fact occur. The chief critic of the interference was Rafiq al-Hariri.

It's important to note that the abstentations were explained as objections to the resolution addressing domestic political concerns of a member nation that had not officially requested the resolution. China and Russia could have vetoed, but declined.

These indications lead me to believe the US wants Europeans to try their hand with Syria, but I still think the hit was an Iranian job. Iran was the most protected of the parties that could pull off this job. It's negotiations with the Euro trio are too engaged for the Europeans to abandon. Iran is calculating that Europeans are too implanted against hard power for their governments to implicate Iran in the assasination.

Debka and Larry Johnson both say Syria, but this strike would make Syria the Prophet of Idiocy.